Josh Young wrote:Pete, you are saying you could take a sport fighting system and use it against a martial system?

Don't forget....'sports' fighting systems have their roots in actual combat systems....western fencing stems from the real use of rapiers, epees, etc., Kendo ('the way of the sword) is rooted in Kenjutsu ('the method/technique of the sword') and Iaido ('the art of drawing the sword') is rooted in Iaijutsu. Because of this, Fencing and Kendo still retain some martial content (albeit watered down) and therefore could plausibly be used to defend oneself.

Josh Young wrote:Pete, you are saying you could take a sport fighting system and use it against a martial system?

This isn't an issue of ego at all.

You can speculate all you want, but what real life experience do you have on this subject?

I'm thinking that Mike Tyson was a "sport fighter". Same with Ali and many others but I'm sure you could easily handle them with your Tai Chi. You're that good. However, I'm also pretty sure that someone who has experience with a foil or epee would have you so full of holes, so quickly, that your attempt at getting close to pull some Tai Chi move would be the last thing you ever do. In other words you're starting to sound like a 10 year old. And because this is a forum, you may very well be 10 years old.

Of course sports like boxing increases your chances in a fight. But training boxing in a ring won't give you a slightest idea about defending yourself against a knife.

You seem to be saying that there is some martial art out there that teaches you how to protect yourself against everything? And who's to say that a boxer, with quick hands, can't knock a knife away from an attacker? Or deflect a thrust? Don't boxers learn to deflect and avoid? It would seem everyone on this forum thinks that only something Chinesey is a "worthy" martial art.A word of advice - be careful who you say this to. Just knowing Tai Chi will not prevent the so called "fat lip" and it might be your's. Then, at least you can use your Qigong to heal it. Sorry, my sarcasm is showing through.

Pete...you are clearly twisting my words. How do you make the assumption that I think that a martial art would protect you from everything? That's just silly. The key word is practice. You won't be immortal, no matter how much martial training you have. But it increases your chances. Training self defense against a knive: increases your chances. Train a lot: increase your chances a lot.

It's plain simple. The aim is to improve, not to be a master in a few times at a dojo. Hey, you won't be a Bethoven after a few lessons of piano. But you might get close if you train it like hell,,,like you're supposed to train martial arts if you want the benefits...and still you might get hurt.

I'm sorry for the next assumption I have to confess to you...it might sound like an insult but I don't mean it like that. But it seems you haven't really been to a martial art where you actually practice against someone with a knife. As well as you made a question in another post where you were surprised that you actually train against multiple opponents in martial arts. What's the big deal? The word is: martial art. What's the use of it if you don't take life seriously and train your art for the most terrible situations?

About a boxer learning against knife...no way! This is really hard to explain if you've had no experience with knives or other weapons. But a knife turns the situation to totally different. You can't rely on your basic blocking and hitting reflexes. If you train against a knife, you must have a feeling all the time of how dangerous only one small slice is. You must also train how to attack with a knife to be able to understand the knife man's logic. You should know the tricks a person with a knife would possibly use etc etc.

And weapon training isn't useless even if you never encountered one in a situation. It teaches the practioner about how to keep distances and what are the weaknesses when one relies on his/her tool.

p.s.I don't know if what I said about "should also learn how to attack with a knife" goes well with the principles of tai chi since I'm new to it. It's from my experience from other martial arts and I think it's pretty universally applicable anyway.

Brian wrote:Don't forget....'sports' fighting systems have their roots in actual combat systems....western fencing stems from the real use of rapiers, epees, etc., Kendo ('the way of the sword) is rooted in Kenjutsu ('the method/technique of the sword') and Iaido ('the art of drawing the sword') is rooted in Iaijutsu. Because of this, Fencing and Kendo still retain some martial content (albeit watered down) and therefore could plausibly be used to defend oneself.

While true, one can point out that a similar situation is found in marksmanship, someone trained for sporting shooting does not count at being trained in tactical gun use, despite what Pete implies, this true despite the fact that sports shooting has roots in martial use in guns, which are weapons.

Being able to shoot a target with a match pistol does equate to tactical gun training.

Against a serious martial artist of high caliber Mike Tyson would not stand a chance, despite being a good boxer. However against a person with some training in foil, who has an iron pipe, Tyson would prevail. Modern foil does not focus on practical use of the weapon, such as striking major organs etc.

You know Pete, you seem really opposed to the idea of Chinese martial arts, you have not once complimented them here, but slander them in so many ways, you have no faith in them, or taijiquan. Why are you here, just to argue?

caesar wrote: How do you make the assumption that I think that a martial art would protect you from everything? That's just silly. Training self defense against a knive: increases your chances. Train a lot: increase your chances a lot.

But it seems you haven't really been to a martial art where you actually practice against someone with a knife.

About a boxer learning against knife...no way! This is really hard to explain if you've had no experience with knives or other weapons. But a knife turns the situation to totally different. You can't rely on your basic blocking and hitting reflexes. If you train against a knife, you must have a feeling all the time of how dangerous only one small slice is. You must also train how to attack with a knife to be able to understand the knife man's logic. You should know the tricks a person with a knife would possibly use etc etc.

I don't know if what I said about "should also learn how to attack with a knife" goes well with the principles of tai chi since I'm new to it. It's from my experience from other martial arts and I think it's pretty universally applicable anyway.

You'll have to take my word on this, but I know exactly what it's like to have someone try and kill me with a knife. To be honest, all the training and videos on the subject sort of just go out the window when actually faced with it because things like that NEVER happen like they are "supposed to".

Brian wrote:Don't forget....'sports' fighting systems have their roots in actual combat systems....western fencing stems from the real use of rapiers, epees, etc., Kendo ('the way of the sword) is rooted in Kenjutsu ('the method/technique of the sword') and Iaido ('the art of drawing the sword') is rooted in Iaijutsu. Because of this, Fencing and Kendo still retain some martial content (albeit watered down) and therefore could plausibly be used to defend oneself.

Being able to shoot a target with a match pistol does equate to tactical gun training.

Against a serious martial artist of high caliber Mike Tyson would not stand a chance, despite being a good boxer.

Why are you here, just to argue?

I don't know about you but when the bullets start flying I've always felt just a bit more secure if the guy beside me was a good shot. But maybe that's "just me".

I going to assume you are a "serious martial artist of high caliber", at least that's the impressionyou seem to want to give people. With that said I'm going to bet that 'ole Iron Mike could have your rib cage in more pieces than could be put back together, before you touched him.

Josh Young wrote:Against a serious martial artist of high caliber Mike Tyson would not stand a chance, despite being a good boxer.

What? A "martial artist o fhigh caliber".. what is your definition? Mike is (not was, IS) a FIGHTER, with a capital F! The dude bit someone's ear! The dude knows not, nor cares much for rules.

I know one would want to believe that studying a MARTIAL ART, automatically makes them a fighter, but it doesnt. It trains them in certain attributes of a fighter (timing, distance), but does NOT make that person a fighter.

Self defence is NOT fighting either. Nor does being a martial artist mean that you can succeed in self defence.

Fighting is a totally different animal. Literally no rules. No decency. Literally, whatever is needed is allowed. This is very hard for martial artists to accept as we have a certain training. Sports also have certain training. To compare martial artist to sport and say one is superior is lunacy! Under which rules? Under who's "no rules"? LOL

If a sport player could "let go" of the rules (like Mike has shown he is capable of), then you have a very dangerous person. To say otherwise is simply putting ANOTHER set of rules on top. Mike showed folks that he LITERALLY had no rules (dude BIT someone's ear! Costing him LITERALLY millions of dollars..).

There is more to this, of course, but let us grab some perspective! We have people saying that they can beat someone with a stick or sword or knife with their bare hands, and others saying that as long as they have "these rules or those rules"... grow up, all of us!

Josh Young wrote:Against a serious martial artist of high caliber Mike Tyson would not stand a chance, despite being a good boxer.

What? A "martial artist o fhigh caliber".. what is your definition? Mike is (not was, IS) a FIGHTER, with a capital F! The dude bit someone's ear! The dude knows not, nor cares much for rules.

I know one would want to believe that studying a MARTIAL ART, automatically makes them a fighter, but it doesnt. It trains them in certain attributes of a fighter (timing, distance), but does NOT make that person a fighter.

Self defence is NOT fighting either. Nor does being a martial artist mean that you can succeed in self defence.

Fighting is a totally different animal. Literally no rules. No decency. Literally, whatever is needed is allowed. This is very hard for martial artists to accept as we have a certain training. Sports also have certain training. To compare martial artist to sport and say one is superior is lunacy! Under which rules? Under who's "no rules"? LOL

If a sport player could "let go" of the rules (like Mike has shown he is capable of), then you have a very dangerous person. To say otherwise is simply putting ANOTHER set of rules on top. Mike showed folks that he LITERALLY had no rules (dude BIT someone's ear! Costing him LITERALLY millions of dollars..).

There is more to this, of course, but let us grab some perspective! We have people saying that they can beat someone with a stick or sword or knife with their bare hands, and others saying that as long as they have "these rules or those rules"... grow up, all of us!

Tyson is a boxer, he never fought in something like K1 and I doubt he could. He simply does not have the training for it.

I am not a high caliber martial artist, nor do I lack skill.

I am rather familiar with fighting, I have not been in one for several years now but have fought a lot more than the average person and know several street fighters.

It is true there are no rules in a real fight, but they vary too, no two fights I have been in ever went the same, and rarely did fights I saw.

I know a rather good boxer, golden gloves and quite skilled. He fights on the street often actually, he has a very short temper. Like most boxers he cannot defend against kicks to the knees and other moves like that.

Actually the WTBA system is rather ferocious and teaches quite a few moves that work against boxers. I would bet money that a high level WTBA player could do rather well against a boxer with the same amount of training.

Josh Young wrote:Tyson is a boxer, he never fought in something like K1 and I doubt he could. He simply does not have the training for it.

I am not a high caliber martial artist, nor do I lack skill.

I am rather familiar with fighting, I have not been in one for several years now but have fought a lot more than the average person and know several street fighters.

It is true there are no rules in a real fight, but they vary too, no two fights I have been in ever went the same, and rarely did fights I saw.

I know a rather good boxer, golden gloves and quite skilled. He fights on the street often actually, he has a very short temper. Like most boxers he cannot defend against kicks to the knees and other moves like that.

Actually the WTBA system is rather ferocious and teaches quite a few moves that work against boxers. I would bet money that a high level WTBA player could do rather well against a boxer with the same amount of training.

If boxing is so useless why do most mixed martial arts bouts seem to be filled with it? Also, Mike Tyson was making millions boxing but there weren't too many people looking forward to getting into the ring with him and a whole lot less people(if any) who emerged unscathed. Where were the guys who couldn have been making these millions by simply knocking him out. An easy task for whomever these people are that you talk about or yourself for that matter. Even with all that money involved your "hero's"(whomever they are) didn't step forward and show Mike how it's done. Where were they? Or better yet. Who are they? These fighters who could "easily" have taken him down?

pete5770 wrote:If boxing is so useless why do most mixed martial arts bouts seem to be filled with it?

You think that i wrote boxing is useless? Are you only capable of arguing your points by misreading and making straw men of the opinions of others?

Are you unaware that I mentioned I know a boxer who fights on the streets? Perhaps you could read my posts before responding to them?

Mixed martial arts bouts are not boxing bouts, to train for MMA one does not just train boxing. It is well known in MMA that boxing alone has serious flaws, which is why it is called MMA, the first M as you know stands for "mixed"

They mix it because boxing is loaded with flaws that are made up for, typically by adding components found in traditional martial arts, such as limb locks, kicks and throws etc. I really wonder if you have even seen MMA, for you to say it is filled with boxing makes me think you have not ever seen a match at all.

It is funny you have more faith in boxing than you do taiji!

Tyson never seems to have fought outside of boxing, though I did hear stories about fights when he was in prison circulating around amongst felon, I hear he won some and lost some. Who knows?

For you to suggest that a martial artist should have taken him on at boxing is absurd, he was a champion, few boxers would even stand a chance but that doesn't mean he could do MMA at all.

Who is that guy that retired Lesnar with a single kick? (Alistair Overeem)I'd wager that guy could defeat Tyson in MMA, but that Tyson would win against him in boxing.

pete5770 wrote:If boxing is so useless why do most mixed martial arts bouts seem to be filled with it?

Mixed martial arts bouts are not boxing bouts, .......

It is funny you have more faith in boxing than you do taiji!

Last ime I watched an MMA bout the first thing both men did at the start was dance around each other throwing punches.....but that's not boxing. Right?During all three rounds of this fight both men threw at least 10 times the amount of punches than they did kicks...... but that's not boxing. Right?There were a couple of take downs and while they were down both of them were trying to hit the other with his fists.......but that's not boxing. I mean hitting someone with your fists just isn't boxing. Right?During most of this MMA fight both men were trying to protect themselves with their hands, arms, and fists so that the other guy couldn't land punches........ but that's not boxing. Right?

Sure I have faith in boxing. It works and it's great for self defence. Tai Chi for self defence? Good luck with that. Oh god, I just had a thought. How does this sound to you? Bruce Buffer is announcing the next fight. "In this corner wearing black trunks, he's a Tai Chi candle puncher, with a record of 16-1 with 13 of those extinguish's being via submissions.........". Sound good?We'll put you in there with some washed up bum like Chuck Lidell. He was basically just a boxer anyway. You have them "handled". Right? You'll be 17-1 and you won't even work up a sweat. (Athough that would most likely be because your head got knocked off 4 seconds in.)

pete5770 wrote:How does one compete in a boxing match without "throwing punches"?

Nobody said that someone can compete in boxing without punching, so this is a ridiculous question.

What is the proper way to describe "striking with the fists" if not boxing?

It is called punching. Punch is a verb meaning to strike with fists and a noun meaning a strike with a fist.

Punching does not a boxer make, a lot of martial arts have punches Pete, that doesn't mean they are boxing.

I think you're wrong. There are no "ridiculous questions" but there are a lot of answers that have no meaning. You seem to know all the answers but none of the questions. It's the people who ask the questions that move and shake the world. Anyone can provide answers. Knowing what to ask is the hard part.As for boxing and punching and how they relate? To put it simply you're "off the deep end" as the saying goes.